Say one thing for Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich: He seems to have at least tried to conduct his shake downs in private. In Albany, they call press conferences to chronicle theirs.

Blagojevich, of course, came a cropper via FBI wiretaps.

Law-abiding New Yorkers can only hope the proper authorities are paying equally close attention to the efforts of three Democrats – Carl Kruger of Brooklyn and the Bronx’s Ruben Diaz and Sen.-elect Pedro Espada – to shake down state Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith for high public office.

As well as to Smith’s unseemly eagerness to be shaken down.

And, further, to Gov. Paterson’s willingness to roll around in the muck with the whole unsavory lot.

Let’s be frank: The bargaining between would-be Senate Majority Leader Smith and the so-called “Gang of Three” is as offensive, and as corrosive to public confidence in government, as anything hatched in the bowels of Cook County.

Last week, with Gov. Paterson in the room, Smith announced at a press conference that Kruger, Diaz and Espada would support him as Senate Democratic leader in return for prime leadership positions and committee assignments – and, what is essentially the point, the fat cash stipends and other perks that go with such posts.

The deal began falling apart as other Senate Democrats rebelled. Then, yesterday, the wheels truly fell off the wagon.

“We are suspending negotiations, effective immediately,” Smith said – also at a press conference. Continuing the talks “would reduce our moral standing and the long-term Senate Democratic commitment to reform and change.”

Reduce what moral standing?

Someone needs to tell Smith that offering items of value – personally lucrative committee chairmanships, for example – in exchange for the legislative votes needed to make him majority leader arguably is a crime.

Moral standing, indeed.

That Gov. Paterson chose to demean himself and his office by participating publicly in the sordid deal-making shows a remarkable lack of judgment.

And his failure, once engaged, to effect a lasting settlement demonstrates an appalling shortage of political skills.

Smith, meanwhile, has committed an unforgivable political blunder: He has rendered himself totally ridiculous, and in public to boot.

Paterson isn’t far behind.

How do the two of them propose actually to govern when the time comes – if, in Smith’s case, it ever does come?